Our population problem: not dead yet

By Michael Pascoe

December 24, 2010 — 7.45am

For those worried about too many people in Australia, or at least the inability to find a car park right outside the shops on Saturday morning, there's an overlooked aspect to our alleged population problem: we're not dying.

Perhaps more accurately, we're not dying as much as we used to. Death is on a go-slow. Despite the Grim Reaper having 22 million, 342 thousand of us to chose from on June 30, he only took 140,629 over the course of the last financial year – a fall of 2.2 per cent on his 2008-09 work. Given the larger population, Mr Reaper's productivity is in serious decline.

With so much happening this week – NBNs, MRRTs, ASICs, GST avoidance undermining capitalism and Ken Henry going full-time with the wombats - the Australian Bureau of Statistics quarterly demographic release tended to slip by without much comment.

The main news was that our population growth rate continues to retreat from its 2009 peak of 2.2 per cent, down to 1.7 per cent in the year to June 30, still a healthy rate but the lowest it's been in three years.

Advertisement

The expected slow-down was well known but pointedly ignored during the grubby election campaign with its dog-whistle politics and boat people demonisation, but it turns out our population growth rate would be lower again if it wasn't for the new challenge facing the nation: too much living.

The ABS has a particular set of numbers that demonstrate what a slacker Death has become.

Death's key performance indicator for long and short-term bonus payments is the SDR - Standardised Death Rate, deaths per thousand standard population. Over the last financial year, it dropped to 5.63 – it was 6.17 five years ago and averaged a fraction over 6 for the previous four years.

No wonder Gen Y and X are antsy about housing prices – us boomers just aren't shuffling off as quickly as we used to, not providing enough deceased estate auctions. It's very inconsiderate of us. Euthanasia isn't a civil liberties issue, it's a question of housing affordability.

Death still knocks more in some states and territories than others. On a proportionate basis, there's a much better chance of attending a funeral in the Northern Territory (standardised date rate 8.04) than in the ACT (SDR 5.16 – but some might argue there's not much difference between being alive and dead in Canberra anyway).

Even in those examples of the best and worst places for dying, Death isn't trying as hard as he used to. The NT's SDR, while far and away the nation's highest, still had the sharpest fall, from 9.04 to 8.04. It was a whopping 9.43 in 2005-06.

The ACT's low 5.16 was down from 5.67 the year before. And in case you're wondering, the second deadliest state is Tasmania with 6.69 – comfortably ahead of South Australia on 5.77. Well, we all know about SA, but Tassy? What happened to the apple-a-day story?

In the grander scheme of things, births, deaths, migration and whatever state of existence is current in Canberra might not mean much. Another part of the ABS release looked at international population projections out to 2050. With our unwillingness to die, Australia's projected population in 40 years is just 34 million, but that means we would only drop one place on the world's population ladder, from our current 54th to 55th spot.

That's as good as steady, particularly when, on current trends, there are some quite noticeable changes in the rankings.

The Canadians are slated to drop from 36th today with 36 million lumberjacks to 45th place on 41 million, but Italy's diving from 23rd (58 million) to 35th (50 million) and Greece falls 20 places from 75th to 95th as the population falls from 11 million to 10 million – which is probably still more than they will be able to afford with German assistance.

The shrinking standout though is Japan, tipped to drop from 10th place (127 million) to 20th (94 million). And if you think adding 12 million people is a social challenge, losing 34 million is in another league of policy crisis altogether. Maybe Bob Brown would like to try government in Japan.

For all the little losers, there has to be a big winner: India. From second place with a population of 1173 million in 2010, it's projected to claim first place with 1657 million in 2050. Apparently Indians think size does count. China is expected to be relatively stable – 1330 million now, 1304 million then.

Of course, it might not happen: policies change, plagues break out, people devote themselves to updating their Facebook page instead of having a real life and making babies, all sorts of things.

For example, on current trends, the ABS reckons the population of Melbourne will overtake that of Sydney around 2040. (Sydney is expected to have 4,541,800 shallow souls in 2011 and 6,527,300 in 2041, while Melbourne should have 4,079,600 artistic aerial ping-pong fans next year and 6,573,100 in 2041.)

It won't necessarily happen – projections are just projections. It is a possibility that changes in government policy could make housing more affordable in Sydney than in Melbourne and people there will get sick of “reading books in tiny dark bars”. The Emerald City might rediscover its mojo and the prospect of another bleak winter surrounded by people who talk about nothing except a particularly insular football code could drive a wave of mental health refugees north. It's possible.

In any event, with the federal government having no less than three committees dithering around on population, each committee's chair displaying their existing prejudices, there's plenty of room for the population debate to evolve. So, in 2011, let's move that debate on to where the government really could make a difference: getting Death back to work.

Despite the political ravings and some economic qualms, we really don't have much choice on the immigration side as we need to import the skills and education we weren't smart enough to invest in ourselves. But encouraging more deaths, hey, lots of governments do it. The danger is, the Greens might take this seriously.

Michael Pascoe is a BusinessDay contributing editor, who, despite the favourable policy outcomes of the alternative, wishes everyone a safe and happy Christmas.